Arthur the King

I guess Dyan Cannon, Macolm McDowell, Edward Woodward, Candy Bergen, Liam Neeson and Rupert Everett must have been in it just for the paycheck. This film is bad-- even for TV. I rented it because I was desperate for a bit of romance for my wife who was ill. Well, it was a stinker. The low budget special effects were out of the three stooges era. The fight scene with King Arthur and the "Undead knight" was a high point, reminding me of Monty Python's Holy Grail. I could go on and on about the abuses to the Arthurian legend but this film is a parody of itself and little more can be said on that account. My biggest disappointment was Candace Bergen who has been a long time fav. Another reviewer here has already noted the shortcoming in her role and we can leave it at that. Neeson was absolutely comical; Everett was ghastly; Woodward was his hambone usual delightful self and Dyan Cannon, (born the same year as myself) was great because she was playing herself. Unless, you're really bored and looking for a lampoon of a costume drama, I might not recommend this one.

This movie is, as the previous comment tells, pretty bad. However, the one redeeming quality of it is that it covers some ground that no other Arthurian movies (to my knowledge) cover: characters such as Gawain, Agravain, and Mordred have more than bit parts and the famous "rape of Guinevere" story is also dealt with. It is a very 80's film, though; the makeup and costumes capture that anachronism rather glaringly.

i personally loved this movie, i especially loved Edward Woodward aka The Equalizer, as Merlin and i thought Candice did an interesting job as Morgan, she portrayed Morgan as having a really bad day with a hell of a chip on her shoulder but decent none the less. even though i don't typically like ones that put her in a bad light. i liked this since i was a child and i still think it is a charming movie, true it was done low budget and is nowhere near the blockbuster Excalibur was but still worth seeing. is is great if your interested in the story of Gawain and Lady Ragnell's relationship sice most films don't even mention the two of them. and it of course includes the romance between lance and gwen. i liked the spunk they gave to gwen in this, a girl that has some fight in her who yells no when her captors wanted to have their way with her and they back off. so all in all i would definitely recommend this film, especially if you are like me and like edward woodward. great brit actor.

The actors tried, they really did, but it was badly cast, the writing was so-so. The one redeeming virtue in this film is the only dramatization of Sir Gawain and the Loathly Lady that I've ever seen. This is a wonderful story, and should be made into its own movie. Go read it, and learn something very important -- what is it that women truly want?

Unbelievable. This movie is without a doubt one of the poorest excuses for wasting celluloid I have ever seen. I like the whole King Arthur/Knights of the Round Table genre, so I was prepared to give it a little latitude when I started watching it and saw in what direction it was going (downhill), but this movie's stupefying ineptness is mind-boggling. Candace Bergen in a red Bozo the Clown wig, cackling maniacally as she spouts gibberish that is supposed to be magic spells, Liam Neeson playing a Pictish barbarian talking like an Indian in a 1930s western ("Me have many babies with this woman! Me go now!"), poorly staged "battles" that looked more like a crowd of drunks lurching into each other, cheesy special effects, and some of the most brainless dialogue this side of "Plan 9 from Outer Space" combine to make this movie a laugh riot. The "acting" is at a junior-high school level, the photography is washed out, it appears to have been edited with a chainsaw--and they are just its =good= qualities. All in all, an experience to remember--if you can stay awake (I couldn't; I missed the last 20 minutes because this thing put me to sleep...).